If this picture is supposed to entice me into buying some Tom Ford makeup, which I’m pretty sure it is, it isn’t doing the job.

All I can do is stare at that horrible green eyeshadow and note how it clashes not only with her lips, but her cheeks and nails as well. On the other hand, you can’t help but look at it.

And the makeup line itself? I hear that this will be a true luxury line with prices to match. Too bad the packaging looks like the ugly stepchild of Chanel and YSL.

This entry was posted
on Wednesday, June 29th, 2011 at 2:39 am by Glinda and is filed under Beauty FAIL, Beauty in Advertising.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Both comments and pings are currently closed.

10 Responses to “Tom Ford Enters the Beauty Game”

The packaging is fitting, I guess, since Ford did at one time “take over” YSL’s label and subsequently altered the formula on one of my favourite perfumes so that it smells just about like everything else now (instead of the unique fragrance it once was). Anyway both lines are made by the same company, so of course that company would just give each “brand” a slightly different look with the same packaging.

I’m not all that offended by the colour range: I know the idea is to show off the colour by putting it on the model in a way you and I would never really wear makeup in our daily lives. What really gives me the creeps is Tom Ford’s predatory face, and the way he looks like he’s about to strangle and then consume the model whole.

I think we should run all new makeup ‘looks’ past straight men before we buy. I showed this pic to my husband and he burst out laughing, which is not the reaction I’d be looking for if I shelled out for Tom Ford cosmetics

Thea, that’s crazy. I know there are a few exceptions, but generally straight men are not the people to ask on matters having to do with women’s attire or make-up. I burst out laughing at that ad too! But that’s because Tom Ford’s “branding” does that to me, in general. As for the colours being available in other lines–that’s really the big truth here. You used to seek out lines like YSL because they always had hyperpigmented shades you wouldn’t find in other lines–but now, hyperpigmented colours are available everywhere, from MAC all the way down to Maybelline, which is owned by L’Oreal just like Tom Ford’s line (for just a fraction of the price). So he’s going to have to sell this product on packaging and branding alone, because there really isn’t anything “rare” about the colours.

I dunno, Thea, my experience with fashionistas is that they’ll adopt that look uncritically because Tom Ford is a Hot Name, and it’s all about that want to be associated with whatever that Hot Name tells you to buy. And I get that you weren’t asking permission, but I think you should know that it’s possible what a straight man wants to see in you may not be what you would want to put out into the world. I’m thinking of all those 1970’s era KISS (and the like) album covers here, although the clothing pictured there has turned up on many a mis-styled starlet lately. And that actually makes my point: it’s designed to appeal to straight men’s fantasies, not to women’s needs in reality. You might not want to use that as a “beauty standard”.

Love the discussion – cause I think we are heading in the same direction from different angles.

I don’t think we should accept a gay man or fashionista’s ‘beauty standard’ any more than we shold a straight man. One puts us in putrid green eyeshadow, but granted, if not restrained, the other has us draped over the hood of a Corvette while wearing a snakeskin mini skirt.

It is really about knowing what makes us happy and standing up to both sides of the equation for what makes us happy personally

Now that, I agree with, Thea! What I wear on my face or on my body has to make me feel pretty and happy and comfortable. Of course, it’s nice if other people also like my look, but if *I* don’t like it, I’m not wearing it. And if I *do* like it and other people don’t, well, that’s okay. They don’t have to. I don’t dress for straight men, gay men, or fashionistas (or anyone else). I dress for my own enjoyment and comfort. It’s only a bonus if someone else likes it, too.

It’s a tightrope walk: balancing what you like with what is considered “pretty” today-whether it be trendy, edgy, or whatever.
and just when you think you got it down, bang! styles change or your face/skin/lifestyle changes and it’s back to square one

Disclaimer: Manolo the Shoeblogger is not Mr. Manolo Blahnik. This website is not affiliated in any way with Mr. Manolo Blahnik, any products bearing the federally registered trademarks MANOlO®, BlAHNIK® or MANOlO BlAHNIK®, or any licensee of said federally registered trademarks. The views expressed on this website are solely those of the author.